Let's compile a list of cons to circumcision that we can later make into an info-graphic so that we have something easy to spread around to other men/parents considering the operation for themselves/their kids.

oneiorosgrip · 2014-02-14T21:14:44+00:00

It violates the circumcised person's bodily integrity before he is old enough to consent. It creates a significant injury. Considering that the injury is deliberate and unnecessary (unlike medical treatment to alleviate a condition of unhealth) it's an act of violence.

It is damaging to the function of the organ upon which it is performed.

Considering that this damaging act of violence is visited upon the child's sex organ, it's a sexual assault.

There really doesn't have to be any other reason besides the first, but not only does it create injury, it's permanent, irreparable injury. There is tissue removed during a circumcision that as of now can't be replaced, only imitated. (NSFW LINK explains).

So, what you have here is a violent sexual assault against a newborn, which does significant, irreparable damage to body... and yet people still defend and advocate it.

That this is so socially acceptable that people are comfortable trying to talk others into accepting it shows the level to which society devalues and marginalizes men and boys. Can you imagine anyone in today's society trying to explain to others why it should be socially to routinely subject infants to the removal of part of any other organ?

Some other links that you might find useful:

Ali A. Rizvi: Male Circumcision and the HIV/AIDS Myth

PrePex in Rwanda: Male Circumcision Associated with Higher HIV Transmission and Higher Profits

Circumcision: Who Profits?

YouDislikeMyOpinion · 2014-02-14T21:19:34+00:00

Con - foreskin is cut off.

dalkon · 2014-02-15T06:55:27+00:00

There's already this ~~infographic~~ diagram and chart on fine touch sensitivity http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/Sorrells.gif from Sorrells et al. 2007.

You might start with that if you wanted to make an NSFW infographic. A description the parts of the foreskin (mucocutaneous junction, ridged band, smooth mucosa, frenulum including frenular delta) vs. the parts of the circumcision (remnant of smooth mucosa and the scar) might be good.

Here's a diagram of the friction-reducing intravaginal motion of the foreskin: http://www.cirp.org/pages/anat/interc02.gif NSFW

Here is a somewhat labelled photo of an intact penis: NSFW It shows how minimal the ridged band actually looks when the foreskin is retracted. It also shows how the foreskin adds to the girth of the penis. People think they're making the penis look bigger with circumcision, but that's debatable. It's not debatable that circumcision makes the penis thinner.

Zaulankris · 2014-02-16T14:14:53+00:00

Sex is different from the female perspective and in a good way (I would know, I have a vagina and have used it more than once for um, science). I would liken circ sex to dildo penetration. Not that a dildo/circ sex is bad, just... it's not the same and I do not prefer it if given the choice. An intact penis feels more organic and IME tends to be more comfortable (feels wetter and the foreskin sliding around is pretty awesome).

There's also the thing that you're removing a lot of nerve endings. People like to say "but lots of people have good sex after MGM, so that's not true that it decreases pleasure" but... how does this logic even work? Brains, especially those of younger people, are very good at compensating for things (for example, our brains fills in the missing information in our eyes' blind spot). Just because someone experiences some kind of handicap and learns to function normally, this does not make it okay to intentionally inflict harm on them.

rightsbot · 2014-02-14T21:02:16+00:00

Post text automatically copied here. (Why?) (Report a problem.)

Comments